opposing unnecessary, excessive and intrusive powerline development

REVOLT Newsletter 199

Revolt news 03/11/2005

1. CPRE takes a helpful stand in defence of the countryside. Current
issues outlined in the latest edition of Countryside Voice focus largely
on housing plans and the new planning system following the 2004 Planning
and Compulsory Purchase Act. Another theme is tranquillity in the
countryside. What a good word, tranquillity! It summarises what is most at
risk from powerlines and windfarms, as well as from housing and traffic.
CPRE want to produce tranquillity maps covering the whole country. BBC
Radio 4 Today listeners were asked where they could find 10 minutes of
sheer tranquillity. Seventy five places were successfully nominated, many
in protected landscapes. But the government's annual State of the
Countryside report has nothing to say about tranquillity. Walking the
other day on the scarp edge of the North York Moors National Park near
Scarth Nick, I was struck by the roar of the distant A19 traffic, even
though I was hundreds of feet higher up and a few miles away. Is
tranquillity vanishing from the English countryside?

2. A new report
from EEF http://www.eef.org.uk/UK/
, the leading manufacturers' group in the UK, called (I think) the
Engineering Employers' Federation, exposes the shortcomings of wind power.
The EEF urges the Government to build a new generation of nuclear power
stations, as part of a balanced strategy for acceptable long-term low-
cost energy in the UK. It warns that gas shortages and high gas prices
might damage industry and risk large scale shut-downs this winter.

3.
Questions are being asked about the reliability of the Basslink project
connecting Tasmania to mainland Australia (APPENDIX 1). Revolt news has
heard much of the Basslink project and the objections it has provoked in
Australia over the last few years. It looks like the cost is coming home
to Tasmania, with a projected 2 billion dollars to fall upon them.

4.
It's only a press article (APPENDIX 2) from the Sunday Times, but these
words could signal a Scottish political sea change: "views within the
executive had changed". The words are attributed to "an
executive source" from the Scottish Executive. The source went on
"and while ministers still see a role for wind farms under their
target of generating 40% of the country's power from green sources by
2020, they are becoming keener on wave energy which is likely to provoke
less controversy". It may have taken the media savvy of envisaging
golden eagle corpses displayed in front of windfarms, but has the Scottish
Executive now got cold political feet about the rush for wind farms in
Scotland's best scenic areas?

5. A response (APPENDIX 3) to Dermot
Finnigan's position with his property has been received from http://www.wayleave.co.uk
, a firm of wayleave consultants. Revolt does not recommend any
consultants as we sometimes receive negative as well as positive feedback,
so landowners must make their own assessments. Nevertheless, the main
message makes sense: don't sign wayleave agreements for peppercorn rents.
And be cautious in any case, especially of effectively permanent problems
arising from nominally temporary wayleaves. Some landowners on the
Yorkshire line have been scrupulously careful in not signing anything and
making it explicit that they give no agreement. They have refused the
meagre rentals anyway, for fear of their being used to establish a
contractual liability surreptitiously. If only the industry were open and
above board in its dealings, landowners would not be faced with such
sneaky problems.

6. One of the liabilities attaching to wayleaves is
safety. Dermot Finnigan's case shows that National Grid think this
liability even attaches to adjacent landowners where there is no wayleave
agreement, either voluntary or compulsory. Meanwhile Dermot reports a DTI
officer saying there should be a wayleave (i.e. when there is an
over-swing and safety implication, even if in still air there is no
oversail). See APPENDIX 4.

7. The High Court 28.10.05 dismissed on
all counts Scottish Power's legal challenge to Ofgem's decision to approve
National Grid's new charging arrangements for the high-voltage
transmission network. Revolt welcomes this result. It means that grid
charges will be more cost- reflective than those preferred in Scotland to
subsidise transmission from already heavily subsidised remote wind farms.
See APPENDIX 5.

8. On the subject of recognising medical conditions,
I was absolutely delighted to hear (BBC online 1.11.05) of the landmark
decision of the Pensions Appeal Tribunal (PAT) to grant a disability
pension for Gulf War Syndrome to veteran Daniel Martin. With the onus of
proof on showing there was such a condition, beyond normal military
effects, the tribunal found "there is a Gulf War health effect".
The MOD is reported as dismissing the findings, maintaining that the
illnesses suffered by veterans are so varied there can be no distinct
syndrome or a specific cause. So what! It's multiple causes (MOD generated
too) and multiple effects. What very shameful government treatment of
disabled veterans, using a smoke-screen of uncertainty and complexity to
deny their injuries and pensions!

9. Following on from the above
item, electro-sensitivity (ES), or electrical hyper-sensitivity (EHS), is
the subject of a report today 3.11.05 from HPA-RPD (the old NRPB),
"Definition, Epidemiology and Management of Electrical
Hypersensitivity" by Dr Neil Irvine: http://tinyurl.com/73bkx
There have been short delays in publishing this review, after HPA-RPD
statements earlier this year that it would set the scene for ES being a
recognised valid diagnosis, and then later statements that the HPA is not
in a position to make a decision on whether ES is a "medical
condition" or not, as that is for the medical profession to decide on
an international basis. The HPA press release today says "the use of
the term electrical sensitivity in the review does not imply acceptance of
a causal relationship between symptoms and attributed exposure".
People with symptoms of sensitivity to the growing
"electro-smog" of modern life are concerned to have the
condition recognised; see http://www.electrosensitivity.org.uk
.

Mike Repacholi, of the WHO EMF team, has expressed sympathy
but says research shows it is a psychological rather than physical
phenomenon. APPENDIX 6 gives a Powerwatch Press Statement issued
yesterday.

***** *****

APPENDIX 1. Media Release 30 October
2005 Power shortages : Can Basslink realistically help the mainland?

Power
shortages : Can Basslink realistically help the mainland? and Can Tasmania
afford Basslink? will be the topics of discussion at the AGM of the
Basslink Concerned Citizens Coalition on Wed 23 Nov at the Gormandale
Community House.

Keith Borthwick Chair of the Coalition said that
last week's announcement that Basslink will cost the state of Tasmania
$2.2Billion comes as no surprise to the group.

"For five years,
from our very initial calculations we have predicted that the whole
Basslink project was going to cost Tasmania $90million a year for 25
years. We were told that the figure was nowhere near that and that any
further figures were protected by commercial confidentiality. Indeed the
Basslink Joint Advisory Panel itself said the project was marginal in its
initial findings following the hearings held in 2002.

"However,
last week's annual report from HydroTasmania finally admits to our
predicted cost. It is also significant that Hydro Tasmania has declined to
say how much power it expects to sell interstate and how much profit it
hopes to make. (Mercury 28 Oct 05)

"If the average wholesale
price for peak power remains at its current level, then we fail to see how
Hydro Tasmania can realistically cover this cost. If the peak price rises
Hydro Tasmania will face competition from a number of other projects on
the drawing board waiting for the price to rise."

How reliable
is Basslink?

"Furthermore," continued Mr Borthwick,
"with Hydro Tasmanian dams currently at 38.8% capacity, it is
unlikely that Basslink would have been able to provide power during times
of peak demand even if the undersea cable had been operational. Simon
Krohn, Hydro Tasmania's Group Production manager in an article in
International Water Power and Dam Construction, 25 October 2005, admits
that Tasmania is going to be dependent on Basslink for importing
electricity and drought proofing Tasmania."

THE former head of Channel 4, Sir
Jeremy Isaacs, has won a partial victory in an angry dispute over the
planned siting of a wind farm on the Isle of Skye.

The Scottish
executive is to call in an application for the erection of 27 turbines at
Edinbane, taking the decision out of the hands of local councillors who
voted to approve the developments. A similar scheme at neighbouring Ben
Aketil is also to be recalled by ministers.

Isaacs was one of a
number of objectors, claiming the turbines would threaten rare wildlife,
damage the landscape and harm the tourism industry.

The Royal
Society for the Protection of Birds claimed that collisions with the
blades could kill one golden eagle every two years.

The executive
has now accepted that the plans could have a serious impact on some of the
world's most endangered birds. Ministers want to consider them in detail
before deciding whether the turbines should be allowed.

The move
reflects growing unease about the impact of turbines on sensitive sites
around Scotland.

The scale of concern within the executive is
revealed in an exchange of private e-mails obtained using freedom of
information legislation.

Dr Ian Bainbridge, the executive's chief
ecological adviser, told colleagues in the environment and rural affairs
department that he had "concerns about the possible effects on golden
eagles from the two sites combined and, on the data provided, associated
with the Edinbane case in particular".

He added: "It may
well be sensible to call in both cases and give more consideration to the
potential effects of both. We are beginning to see very clearly the need
for cumulative assessments of the effects on gold eagles in
particular."

His comments were in relation to a letter sent to
the department by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.

Stuart
Housden, the society's Scottish director, warned that new data gathered by
the developer behind the Ben Aketil plan "establishes that a very
high collision risk to golden eagles will occur if the Edinbane proposal
is built".

He added: "This will impact on the golden eagle
population for a large area of the western Highlands."

An
executive source said it was now certain that the plans would be called in
for ministers to consider, leading at the very least to a lengthy delay.
Ministers may decide to order a public inquiry into the plans, demand that
they be scaled down or reject them outright.

He said views within
the executive had changed and while ministers still see a role for wind
farms under their target of generating 40% of the country's power from
green sources by 2020, they are becoming keener on wave energy which is
likely to provoke less controversy.

"Basically people like
Bainbridge have won the argument. There are still those who think the
evidence that golden eagles are at risk is flimsy but we're not going to
take the chance. The executive is going to take a close interest in these
projects and that means calling them in," said one executive source.

Isaacs
and his wife Gillian Widdicombe, who claim to have experienced abuse over
their opposition to the plans, welcomed the change of heart.

"I'm
very glad to know that some people in the executive now realise it isn't
black and white and that they have to give thoughts to others as well as
to their own predilections about arbitrary targets which are not joined-up
energy policy," he said.

"We were concerned about
important general issues. Onshore wind farms in some cases patently are a
blot on Scotland's wonderful landscape, a threat to its wildlife and can
damage Scotland's important tourism industry."

Isaacs said that
he would continue to highlight the risks posed by wind farms "across
the whole of Scotland and particularly in the Highlands and Islands".

Among
them is a plan to build Britain's biggest wind farm on the neighbouring
island of Lewis. The Western Isles council has backed the scheme but the
application now looks likely to be called in by ministers, following
warnings that it could kill at least 50 golden eagles, 50 merlin and up to
150 red-throated divers due to collisions.

***** *****

APPENDIX
3. 400 kV swing envelope - Sale.

I read with interest
REVOLT Newsletter 198 and earlier Newsletter items in connection with
Dermot Finnigan's dispute with National Grid at Sale.

No
wayleave exists across Dermot Finnigan's land but the swing envelope of
the neighbouring 400kV power line impinges upon the property under
conditions of maximum sag & swing.

Wayleave.co.uk has
successfully concluded hundreds of compensation claims on behalf of owners
throughout the U.K. whose land is over sailed by overhead powerlines
including many instances where the lines swing across the property as they
do in Mr Finnigan's case. We have been successfully acting for landowners
since 1998.

Our web site at www.wayleave.co.uk illustrates that all
electricity wayleaves (even small schemes such as wood poles, buried LV
cables, staywires and the like) are, once completed, treated by the DNOs
as though they were permanent rights. One lady who contacted us recently
faced a demand of £15,000.00 from the incumbent Network Operator after it
emerged that she had inadvertently constructed her garage 3" over a
buried low voltage cable on her property.

The rule of thumb is
"if you want it moved - you have to pay".

It is little
appreciated that whilst the Electricity Act 1989 privatised the
electricity industry - it also widened powers enjoyed by the regional
electricity companies to retain wayleaves - one of a number of reasons we
advise owners against signing so-called 'terminable' electricity wayleaves
- for 'peppercorn' wayleave rentals.

We would be pleased to offer
our experience in assisting any of your members or other contacts who have
been asked to grant new wayleaves for anything from a pole to a pylon or
who would like our assistance in formulating their claim for compensation
for electricity apparatus.

I am attaching an extract of our web
site, for your information.

Kind Regards,

David Phillips
Principal - Swansea.

***** *****

APPENDIX 4 Wayleaves and
safety: Dermot Finnigan's case at Sale.

DTI has
replied to Dermot that they have asked NGT to confirm in writing that the
current installation complies with the regulations they enforce (namely,
the Electricity Safety, Quality and Continuity Regulations 2002 or ESQCR).

DTI
also refer to "more general Regulations which are also
pertinent" though they do not say where they come from. Regulation
18(5) from this mysterious source requires electricity companies to ensure
safe clearances between lines and buildings or trees, and 18(3) requires
others such as landowners and builders to give reasonable notice to the
owner of the line of any intention to build or plant trees close to the
line.

The clearances then involved are referred to industry
standards: the Energy Networks Association's Standard 43-8 'Overhead Line
Clearances'. These standards are said to specify 5.3 metres' minimum
clearance from the top of a climbable structure to the nearest live 400kV
conductor and 3.1 metres from non-climbable structures.

DTI also
refers to the Electricity Act Schedule 6 paragraph 4 (not the other way
round as for the familiar wayleaves paragraph) which makes damage to
electrical plant by any person an offence with liability to a fine up to
level 3. However, this schedule and paragraph apply to "public
electricity suppliers" which are defined in section 6 of the Act as
suppliers to premises in their area, which does not apply to NG as a
licensed transmitter, so the paragraph may not apply to NG lines.

DTI
go on to say "Landowners also have a duty of care to avoid danger to
themselves and others under other legislation"; it is helpful to
point that out, but any such duty of care related to Schedule 6 appears to
apply specifically to the local supply to the landowner and not to passing
transmission lines.

Meanwhile Dermot reports another DTI officer
saying there should be a wayleave, that is at his property where there is
an over-swing (in the wind) but not a static over-sail. The Electricity
Act (this time Schedule 4 para 6) implies that a wayleave is needed where
"it is necessary or expedient for a licence holder to instal and keep
installed an electric line on, under or over any land". It does not
define "over" in respect of swing in the wind, although there
are lists of definitions given (called "interpretation".

I
have written to DTI for clarification on these points.

***** *****

APPENDIX
5 Ofgem press release R/44 28 October 2005

JUDICIAL REVIEW ON
TRANSMISSION CHARGES

Ofgem welcomes Judge's ruling

The High
Court today (Friday) dismissed on all counts Scottish Power's legal
challenge to Ofgem's decision to approve National Grid's new charging
arrangements for the high-voltage transmission network.

The charging
arrangements needed to recover the £1.7 billion cost of running Britain'
s transmission network had been approved by Ofgem's governing Authority
following extensive separate consultation by both National Grid and Ofgem.

Ofgem
Chairman, Sir John Mogg, said: "We are of course pleased that the
Court has upheld the Authority's decision on every count and believe our
decision is the right one for customers."

"In Scotland
these new charges have already helped reduce the impact of recent
electricity price rises for both domestic and business customers. And the
impact of the new charges on Scottish generation, including renewables, is
broadly neutral."

Notes to editors

1. The new GB-wide
electricity market which began in April 2005 and allows Scottish
generators easy access to the larger demand for electricity in England and
Wales. This is particularly important in Scotland where there is already
surplus capacity and plans are in the pipeline to more than double the
amount of renewable generation.

2. ScottishPower sought a Judicial
Review of Ofgem's Authority's decision in February this year to approve
National Grid's charging arrangements for the charges for the high-voltage
transmission network which came into force when the GB-wide market was
created. The Authority's decision requires National Grid to monitor and
review certain aspects of the charging regime throughout the first two
years that it operates and refine them if necessary.

3. A factsheet
"British electricity transmission networks-future charging" is
available from the Press Office section of the Ofgem website (www.ofgem.gov.uk).

We believe that
Electrical Hypersensitivity (EHS) affects at least 3% of the British
population (maybe 2 million of the 17 million people currently suffering
from long-term chronic adverse health problems). It is important that the
association between exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) and
ill-health effects is medically recognised so that Doctors can advise
appropriate treatments. Sources of EMFs include microwaves radiation from
mobile phones, cordless phones and phone masts, powerlines, etc. The
current preferred method of treatment is using psychiatric drugs. This is
unacceptable.

After press articles on 11th and 12th September in the
Sunday Times and Daily Mail, the HPA-RPD issued a brief statement.
"The report will be a scientific review of the topic of
electrosensitivity with a public health perspective. It will not be a
definitive statement of policy from the Board of the Health Protection
Agency. The Board of the Agency is not in a position to make a decision on
whether electrosensitivity is a "medical condition" or not. This
is for the medical profession to decide on, on an international
basis".

It appeared that the HPA were trying to distance
themselves from the implications of the report, denying that they have any
responsibility for affecting medical policy. An obvious question to ask
then is "Did they collaborate with the Department of Health, before
the review, or after the results of the review were known? What is the
response of the Department of health to the findings?" GPs in other
countries have reported dramatic health deterioration in their patients
who live near microwave radiation sources. No such work has yet been
carried out in the UK, or is even planned as far as we know.

Last
week, on the 28th October, the HPA published another report on the burden
of disease in the UK, that included: "A small percentage of the
population may express an increased sensitivity to a range of electric and
magnetic fields with symptoms including: skin sensitivity, dizziness,
headache and fatigue. This has not been quantified but the symptoms and
increased levels of stress and anxiety will contribute to health
costs". This is a tacit acknowledgement of the problem of EHS, and
its possible implications for an overburdened health service. So, what is
being done to investigate it?

We hope that Neil Irvine's report has
not just turned into a "literature review", as one HPA person
suggested, nor has it been "watered down" to come in line with
current WHO thinking that EHS is "all in the mind". However, we
have been told that "People are just getting paranoid about reported
so-called dangers of EMFs and it is this paranoia that is making them ill,
not the EMF exposure" and when Mike Repacholi (of WHO's EMF project)
was recently reported in New Scientist as saying that "the worst
effects of the Chernobyl nuclear accident are mental health problems
brought on by too much worry", we do have to wonder what is going on
in the minds of the people in charge of investigating these matters.

Perhaps
a clue could be a sentence, discussing potential future research, from an
HPA representative in a paper delivered at the Electrical Hypersensitivity
Workshop in Prague, 2004: "An acceptance that EMF has a causal role
in ES would have widespread implications for future policy on prevention
and management." Maybe the HPA know that the report is going to show
EHS to be a real, debilitating health condition that is affecting a
significant proportion of the country's population? They are fully aware
of the likelihood that the public will want someone to be held
accountable, not only for the causation of the problem, but for providing
the solution. Is it this accountability that they are trying to avoid? Of
course, if the government's Health Protection Agency are unwilling to be
accountable for the protection of the UK population's health from the
effects of EMFs, who will? Surely that is what the HPA is for?